Nov 15 2008

‘True’ Conservatives are Truly Clueless

Published by at 1:44 pm under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

I was trying to write a post on man-made global warming, the fact it has been proven to be a myth and the enormous financial damage the liberals are going to do on a global scale chasing a fool’s errand, when I came across another one of those examples of a far right conservative who feels purity will bring broad consensus and support. Talk about your political morons – purity of consensus requires a small group of like minded people, therefore is political suicide. Here is a flaming idiot with his flame set to full on:

The conservative senator, speaking to a group of GOP officials gathered in Myrtle Beach at a conference on the future of the Republican Party, described how the party had strayed from its own “brand,” which, according to DeMint, should represent freedom, religious-based values and limited government.

“We have to be honest, and there’s a lot of blame to go around, but I have to mention George Bush, and I have to mention Ted Stevens, and I’m afraid I even have to mention John McCain,” he said.

Earth to DeTwit – McCain beat all the ‘pure conservatives’ in the primaries because ‘pure conservatives’ are political poison. Stevens is the only person who deserves to be on this list, but DeMint gets honorable mention for adding to the internal wars and further fracturing the conservative movement and pushing more people out of it than attracting in. It is not lack of agreement on the ‘challenges’ or ‘goals’ (e.g., ‘smaller government’) that have destroyed the conservative coalition, it is the extreme proposals for these goals by purists over the years which have peeled away one issue related group after another.

Let’s back up a second and just get back to first principles of democratic governance. Supporting reasonable diversity of opinion regarding ‘how’ to address a generally accepted ‘challenge’ provides for creating governing coalitions (e.g., ‘how’ to deal with ‘illegal immigration’). When people strive too far into extreme versions of ‘how’ then the larger group of people who agree on the ‘challenge’ fracture into two or more groups. There is infighting and the extreme views of some push many of those who agreed on the ‘challenge’ to conclude the remedies are too toxic or risky to do anything about and they move to the opposing political camp.

George Bush has done NOTHING against conservatives accept deal with the reality that the nation is not far right and does not buy into the far right’s prescriptions for ‘how’ to deal with ‘challenges’. He has to get laws passed through Congress, and that means compromise on the ‘how’.  Success is moving the nation stepwise towards the grander ‘how’ envisioned by some as the ultimate goal.  They key here is movement at a pace the nation will accept and support.

Conservatives became impatient even when Bush was leading a nation through war and to the right. their impatience bloomed when Bush was not giving in to their demands as fast as they wanted. Talk about self absorbed. And for the sin of dealing with reality, the ‘true’ conservatives turned on our nation’s leader and their party’s leader. Which said all anyone needed to know about ‘true’ conservatives, their honor code, their connection to reality, their understanding of what it takes to govern America in the 21st century. If you want to repulse people turn on your allies because you are greedy to have your way now. That is a reputation killer any day of the week.

For example, let me pose a serious question to DeTwit: Since I am not personally tied to any religion I have attained my views on the sanctity of life through a broader sense of spirituality and from science itself, which dictates when life begins and allows us to use the engine of evolution to legally determine an embryo or fetus is not ‘part of the mother’ or simply a ‘clump of cells’. DeTwit claims the GOP is for religion-based values, but I attained my values and views through science and knowledge of the law. My approach has broader appeal and can be accepted by those more tied to science than scripture, and has the benefit of reams of legal precedence regarding DNA testing in trials. My approach happens to validate the views of many who, through faith, also believe in sanctity of life and why it is wrong to kill embryos for spare parts.

So, am I ‘pure’ enough because I use science and law to make an iron clad case against destroying embryos – which happens to validate those religion-based values? Will the DeTwits of the world continue their useless battle against evolution as proven science, as solid as the science that dictates the laws of motion and satellites, planets, etc? Will people armed with a high school level grasp of science continue to demean and challenge those of us who spent years learning about the truth of God’s Creation in amazing detail? This is why the conservative movement is totally busted. I am not a ‘true’ conservative and my efforts to support the right to life efforts is usually met with dazed looks and condescension.

Let me pick up on Immigration Reform again as it is my favorite topic to bash ‘true’ conservatives with. I was listening yesterday to AM Talk Radio (rarely do that at all now, given the dominance of ‘true’ conservatives lamenting the end of the world) and a caller called in with an interesting idea on comprehensive illegal immigration reform.

Now before the purists start going off in the comment sections here, the fact is illegal immigration reform is completely out of reach for years if not decades, accept the liberal blanket amnesty kind that could pass this Congress and get signed by the new President. All those who used scream ‘amnesty bill’ are about to see what a real one looks like. And remember, this is what you all wanted when you torpedoed the McCain-Bush proposal twice. This is what you wanted, and this is all your doing. So don’t whine to me about illegals. The next three years are what you wrought when you tanked the best option conservatives realistically had to make a difference in a quarter of a century. (Note the emphasis on the word ‘realistically’).

Anyway, the point of recalling this call was the sincerity of the caller to find a solution, and the idiocy of the ‘true’ conservative host in response. Again, it illustrates what is wrong with the right and why, even if the Dems do screw up like the did in the last Congress, the conservative movement has little hope of leveraging anything off their screw ups.

The caller was exploring higher income tax rates for migrant workers, especially those who are the long term ‘illegals’ which would transfer into a new migrant worker program. The idea was interesting and I realized we would have to do something to the tax code since most low-end migrant worker jobs are well into that class of incomes where people pay no federal taxes. I could see completely eliminating this loophole for transient workers (i.e., non US Citizens) since they need to pay into the government services they and their families will utilize while here (and possibly waiting for US citizenship). It was an interesting topic on how to make sure immigrant workers pay their share of the load.

The AM Talk Radio host was able to spew back a couple of pure myths before I had to change the channel. For example: Millions of illegals are still poring across our borders.

Not true. Since Bush has been President the border has been strengthened in a variety of ways, and last year was the first year the US did not allow a single illegal caught crossing to just come on in after promising to meet their court date hearing. Last year, and since, all illegals caught at the border are turned back. None come in. Bush did this and it is a major change in our border policy. One I am sure Obama will be overturning.

And then the ‘True’ Conservative said another dumb thing: Why not have them leave and then come back in?

Clearly, this person thinks in terms of cartoon TV level concepts. Simple minded solutions many times come from simple minds. Right now our economy is teetering and we cannot afford any large government programs. To make sure all illegal immigrants ‘went home’ would cost 100’s of billions of dollars. To process them back in would cost 100’s of billions of dollars. And the worker shortage would drive food and other basic product costs out the roof. All this over a some misdemeanors (recall, illegal immigration is not a felony in this country). The stupidity of this concept is just jaw dropping astonishing. 20 million illegals to hunt down, deport, and then check back in simply to let some on the far right get some masochistic sense of punishment is truly a waste of my tax dollars.

Illegal immigration is a paperwork and fee related crime. It is not much different from not carrying insurance on a car in a state that requires it, not paying your taxes on time. Misdemeanor crimes have punishments that usually involve fees and financial restitution (with interest). Conversely, very few crimes require you to give up your house and job. Those that result in that kind of impact result from a stint in jail.

When the ‘true’ conservatives went on the ‘deport them’ screed the damage was done to the GOP brand. When people soil their images to such a stark and pungent degree it can take years to correct, and sometimes never gets fixed. The problem with the conservative movement is it repulses more people than it attracts. This is one of many cases where they became too ugly to bear. Look at what a ‘true’ conservative stands for:

  1. Somehow removing all illegal aliens from the country and putting up massive barriers along our borders. Conveys a nice, warm and friendly view of that city on the Hill? More like a gated community of snobs who cannot be bothered by ‘the masses’.
  2. Opposition to giving senior citizens in poverty or on the edge of poverty a prescription drug benefit through Medicare/Medicaid, a program that reduces the cost of these programs because it removes the need to go to emergency rooms for basic medications. Those mean old Scrooges on the right will try to keep medicine from the sick and poor! Where is the shining city on the hill in this?
  3. Opposition to education reform and a desire to pull their kids out of the public school system. I think it is OK to want better than the public school system can provide for kids (we all do). But to also oppose corrective action on those public schools is a step too far. It again looks like those with money are trying to dump those struggling and run to their enclaves. We are a community which does need to fix problems, not hide in gated communities and private schools.
  4. Bush did not want the war against al-Qaeda to be a war against Muslims or Arabs, but then the ‘true’ right went on a purely religious and race based attack against a company from a moderate allied Arab-Muslim nation that was buying into some of our port operations here in the US. Even worse than the racist and religious bigotry behind the panic was the fact those screaming ‘fire’ were not listening to what was in the deal for national security. The deal included the Arab company paying for and installing Cargo sensor systems in all their international ports that would be feeding products into our port. It was a disaster for the GOP and conservatism.
  5. The ‘true’ conservatives still moan on and on about the statesman focused process McCain and Lieberman and 12 other Senators used to avoid constitutional showdowns with Bush’s judicial appointees. A very small number of appointees were not able to get on the bench, but conversely there was no repeat of the Bork or Thomas fiascos. Anyone still holding a grudge against the Gang of 14 is out of sync with America. We don’t want FL-2000-like confrontations. We don’t want to see people Borked. I sometimes feel the ‘true’ conservatives are simply jealous about the moderates who pulled off a solution that avoided endless litigation.
  6. Harriet Miers was the poster child for moderates and ex-democrats to leave the party. She was inside Bush’s inner circle and someone he knew very well. She was an ex-democrat – like Reagan and many other leaders of the GOP in the 80’s and 90’s until the purity wars erupted. Harriet Miers illustrated how a few extreme (and in the case of David Frum vengeance driven) conservatives would tear down the impure moderates if they tried to attain leadership or positions of power. It was the universal signal to RINOS and Quislings that the GOP umbrella was shrinking and only the pure need apply.
After all this (and more) if anyone is confused about the shrinking GOP brand they are just not paying attention.

As another example from this year’s election look at the circus of the Minnesota Senate race. I can see, just as everyone else can, how the Dems are trying to steal the election there. But the big question is how could the GOP brand be so screwed up that an honorable man like Norm Coleman (and recent GOP convert from a Democrat) could even be challenged by a screw up (screw lose) like Al Franken? How did Obama the neophyte beat McCain the wise man of the middle? How is Coleman the moderate in a fight with a TV Clown?

Let me be clear here on what is happening (and I would love to see polls to ponder this question). If McCain was a Democrat would he have won? If Coleman was a Democrat would he be safely still in office? This is a REALLY important question right now for the GOP. I suspect the answer to both is yes, which is why moderate conservatives are going Blue-Dog instead of RINO (note the respect one moniker has while the other is demeaning) and giving the Dems governing coalitions.

If an individual conservative wants to make a difference, and the voters are repulsed by the ‘true’ conservatives, and the ‘true’ conservatives are attacking other conservatives for not being ‘pure’, the answer is easy. Become a Blue-Dog and have the opportunity to make a difference.

‘True’ Conservatives are ironically proving how right Darwin was. They are not capable of adapting or being flexible enough to succeed, they are not demonstrating to the general population traits that will lead to the population’s success and are therefore being shunned and held back from success. They are showing why evolution is a force to understand and exist with, just like gravity. If you jump of a building in a refusal to accept the force of gravity you are no different than someone who continues down a path that produces more and more failures. The path to death and oblivion is just longer.

The ‘true’ conservatives’ drive to purity is now clearly rejected in ways that could ensure their extinction. Purity is not a force of survival and growth, it is just the opposite. Adaptation is the path to success and long life for your family, their offspring and your values that you instill in them down through time. Me, I am just an observer watching it all play out as it has many times before in our history. Those who went extinct never thought their solution to survival and growth would be the one to fall to the wayside. They never do.

54 responses so far

54 Responses to “‘True’ Conservatives are Truly Clueless”

  1. crosspatch says:

    GuyFawkes … just for you:

    Senator Harry Reid (Senate Minority Leader) received $66,000 from Abramoff tribal clients (and refuses to return it). He also claims to have never met Abramoff, even though his legislative counsel and assistant finance director of his Senate campaign went to work for Abramoff.

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi (House Minority Leader) received $3,000 from Abramoff tribal clients

    Rep. Charlie Rangel took $36,000 from Abramoff tribal clients (and refuses to return it)

    Senator Max Baucus took almost $19,000 from Abramoff tribal clients (he’s now donating tribal colleges in Montana)

    Senator Byron Dorgan (ranking Democrat on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which is currently investigating Jack Abramoff) received $67,000 in contributions from Abramoff tribal clients just weeks after supporting legislation favorable to Abramoff clients. (he’s returning the money, but refuses to step down from the investigation)

    Rep. Patrick Kennedy took $128,000 in donations from Abramoff clients.

    If you’re looking for Democrats who received contributions from Abramoff and his clients, you don’t have to look very far. They represent just about every state.

    Patty Murray (D-WA)
    Brad R. Carson (D-OK)
    Chris John (D-LA)
    Tom Harkin (D-IA)
    John Breaux (D-LA)
    Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
    Steny Hoyer (D-MD)
    Dale Kildee (D-MI)
    Barney Frank (D-MA)
    Peter Deutsch (D-FL)
    Dick Durbin (D-IL)
    Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ)
    Nick Rahall (D-WV)
    John Corzine (D-NJ)
    Fritz Hollings (D-SC)
    Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
    Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
    Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
    Xavier Becerra (D-CA)
    Tim Johnson (D-SD)
    Kent Conrad (D-ND)
    Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
    Kalyn Cherie Free (D-OK)
    Richard Romero (D-NM)
    Ed Pastor (D-AZ)
    John Larson (D-CT)
    James Oberstar (D-MN)
    Brad Sherman (D-CA)
    Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
    Max Cleland (D-GA)
    Gene Taylor (D-MS)
    Doug Dodd (D-OK)
    Jay Inslee (D-WA)
    John Dingell (D-MI)
    Joe Baca (D-CA)
    Carl Levin (D-MI)
    Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
    Bennie Thompson (D-MS)
    Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
    Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
    Robert T. Matsui (D-CA)
    Rodney Alexander (D-La)
    Sander Levin (D-MI)
    Ron Kind (D-WI)
    Ronnie Shows (D-MS)
    Rosa L. DeLauro (D-CT)
    Willie Landry Mount (D-LA)
    Tom Carper (D-DE)
    Thomas P. Keefe Jr. (D-WA)
    Nita M. Lowey (D-NY)
    Maxine Waters (D-CA)
    Ned Doucet (D-LA)
    John Neely Kennedy (D-LA)
    Lane Evans (D-IL)
    Norm Dicks (D-WA)
    Rick Weiland (D-SD)
    Ron Wyden (D-OR)
    Tim Holden (D-PA)
    William “Bribe Money in my Freezer” Jefferson (D-LA)
    Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
    Pete Stark (D-CA)
    Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
    Mike Thompson (D-CA)
    David Phelps (D-IL)
    Derrick B. Watchman (D-AZ)
    Charles S. Robb (D-VA)
    Bill Luther (D-MN)
    Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
    Brian David Schweitzer (D-MT)
    Charles J. Melancon (D-LA)
    Eliot L. Engel (D-NY)
    Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
    Gloria Tristani (D-NM)
    Grace Napolitano (D-CA)
    Joe Lieberman (D-CT)
    Henry A. Waxman (D-CA)
    Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)
    Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
    John Kerry (D-MA)
    Loretta Sanchez (D-CA)
    Shelley Berkley (D-NV)

    From this posting back in 2006.

  2. crosspatch says:

    Republicans root out and boot out corruption in their ranks. Democrats cover it up, attempt to control the investigation, attempt to derail investigations, attempt to cover for their corrupt colleagues. See the difference?

  3. GuyFawkes says:


    “Republicans root out and boot out corruption in their ranks.”

    Oh. So that’s why the Bush Administration has been oh-so-helpful during investigations into the Valerie Plame affair, and the DOJ investigations? Your party perfected the claims of “executive privilege” – how can you sit there and claim that they “root out and boot out” problems, when the current Republican administration has fought any investigations tooth and nail?

    Scooter Libby? Judith Miller? Are you going to hold up Alberto freakin’ Gonzalez as an example of Republicans “rooting out” their problems?

    Both parties are corrupt. I completely agree with you on that point.

    But the statements I quoted above seemed to ignore any and all corruption on the part of Republicans. For anyone to push the “Republicans good, Democrats bad” meme (or, vice versa) is simply unrealistic.

    You will never truly address the current problems in the GOP (which, face it, has big problems) by insisting that corruption only exists in the Democratic party, or by this ridiculous claim that the GOP has lost recently because they tried to be “the nice guy”.

    Be realistic, face the issue head on, and work from there. Starting from a false premise guarantees that NOTHING will get fixed.

    I am not a Democrat, thought I have leaned that way recently. But I believe that this country depends upon a strong opposition party in order to keep everyone honest – and the GOP seems to be making every effort to shoot themselves in the foot every time the opportunity presents itself. Don’t ignore the bad elements in your party – get rid of them, address the issues that have caused the losses in 06 and 08, and then build the party up to something that can at least make the race interesting in 2010 and 2012.

    I am not asking you to say that the Democrats are the party of sweetness and light. I am simply asking you to admit that Republicans have deep-seated problems of their own concerning corruption and graft (and many other issues) too.

    I go back to my original two questions: What does the GOP stand for? And what would you like it to stand for?

  4. dbostan says:

    You are wrong, AJ.
    The defeat of the repubics is due to the fact that betrayed the conservative principles.
    Nothing shows this better than their support (and yours, too) of the amnesty for the illegals.

  5. crosspatch says:

    I think Republicans have deep seated problems in how the press portrays them as inherently corrupt and the Democrats as “above” corruption.

    Of the two parties, I believe the Democrats are the more corrupt by a wide margin. They just have a press that covers for them and that makes the press complicit in that corruption. Where is the hue and cry today about Rangel owing the government half a million dollars? Probably somewhere back on page C-42 buried in an article on local horticulture or something.

    The press simply doesn’t go after corrupt Democrats. When the Abramoff thing broke, I am not aware of a single Democrat that was tainted by the press on the issue, it was portrayed as a Republican scandal when in fact it was quite bi-partisan.

    I believe that when you have a party that controls the White House and both houses of Congress, a strong press is needed to keep them honest. I don’t see our current press corps as standing up to that responsibility. Not when you have news anchors saying their job is to make the Obama presidency a success.

    We don’t have a press anymore for the most part.

    The Republican party rank and file is populated with a large number of passive aggressive “my way or the hiway” types that only know their own satisfaction “right now” and can’t think strategically beyond the current election. ‘Nominate the “wrong candidate” and I will sit out the election and see that the Democrat gets elected to teach you a lesson’ types who quite frankly should simply leave the party. We would be much better off without them.

    But the bottom line is that more government isn’t the answer. It is the problem. Government has a reverse Midas touch. It tends to break everything it touches when it puts its fingers in the private sector. The Democrats want bigger government because that gives them greater power to allocate resources.

    Maybe it will be ok. Maybe the Democrats will so foul things up that they will be kicked out. That is if the press doesn’t still try to portray every one of their failures as the fault of the Republicans somehow.

  6. Redteam says:

    There were two candidates in this presidential election. One was to the left of center, the other was to the far left of center. There was no one for the conservatives to vote for but the lesser of two basically undesirables. The major difference was not in ‘does the US go to hell in a handbasket, but when does it get there.’ So there was very little enthusiasm amongst the conservatives and they didn’t turn out well. The ones that elected Obama turned out better. Had there been a true blue conservative running, especially with Sarah Palin as VP, it would have been much closer, most likely with the Repub winning. I’m a true conservative and I voted for McCain. I didn’t like the choice, but he was infinitely better than the alternative, which I consider totally unqualified to be President.
    One result of the election, and it would have been the same had McCain been elected is, illegal immigration is now a dead issue. All illegals will now be made legal and they will get the full benefit of the American taxpayer paying their way for them. The border will never be secured. So let’s all just forget about that issue.
    Basically, I think the conservatives let the Democrats and formerly MSM select their candidate for them and they picked one with no enthusiasm for the battle. While I personally admire McCain and his standards, he didn’t have the stomach for campaigning.
    So now, let’s try to keep the democrats from totally destroying the US system before we get the chance to begin voting them out again in 2 years. Let’s try to delay the trip to hell by grounding the handbasket.

  7. Terrye says:


    One of the reasons I left the Democratic party was that they had no problem with thieves and liars in their midst.

    This is not to say that both parties do not have people in office who have stepped outside the law, but there is a difference.

    For instance, when Barack Obama broke not only his promise but the rules in regards to campaign finance, he not only got a pass…he got a slap on the back for a job well done.

    The Clintons had more people in their administration indicted than any presidency in history. But what the hell..with that D behind their names the same rules do not apply.

    No, the Democrats really believe that they can lie and cheat with impunity and they really believe that the rules they shove down everyone’s else’s throats do not apply to them.

    That is why they will get away with taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sources they were supposed to be overseeing.

  8. Terrye says:


    No, I don’t think AJ is wrong. I think the truth is conservatives can not decide on what conservative principles are. They fight among themselves too much. One thing about Democrats, when push comes to shove they stick together.

  9. Terrye says:


    I don’t agree with that. McCain was not as far right as Tancredo, but he was further right than Rudy. His voting record on conservative issues was about 82%. Obama’s was 9%. If conservatives can not see the difference then I think they have a cognitive problem.

  10. There are two problems:

    1. At some point over the last 8 years, we have ceased to be a coalition. This correlates with the emergence of the self-described “base” who scream and stomp their feet the loudest.

    2. At some point in the same period, we ceased to be pragmatic, and became ideologues. That works so well. Look at the LP.

    Coalitions have no base by definition. We need to go back to the table and re-negotiate the whole platform. Nobody gets everything he wants — we should have learned that in kindergarten, but the “base” has forgotten it. Look at the SHAMNESTY! idiocy. The children need to grow up and be adults.

  11. Terrye says:


    Yep, I agree.

  12. Terrye says:


    The press has become the propaganda wing of the Democratic party. Needless to say that is okay with people like Guy.

  13. Redteam says:

    Terrye, I don’t disagree with you. But I can recognize conservatism and there hasn’t been much of it around since Reagan. I clearly said McCain is to the right of Obama, hell everybody in the world is. but it’s hard to put anyone that is for amnesty for illegals to the right of center, just to the right of the far left. But my real point was, there was no one for the conservatives to vote for except Palin (we don’t really know her yet, but I sure like what I see so far) so they didn’t turn out. Obama’s support was about the same as Kerry in 04, it was just poor turnout by Repubs for McCain that cost him As I said also, I voted in a state where McCain had a lock, but I still voted to increase the Nationwide support of the opposition to Obama. (I also had a lot of other Repubs to vote for)
    I don’t know if McCain could have done anything different that would have resulted in a win, but being ‘mr nice guy’ sure wasn’t a winning strategy. I think Wright, Ayers, Rezko, liberalism, should have been served in healthy doses EVERY DAY. McCain was honorable in his campaign and that’s admirable, but as long as he used only the truth, all those ‘characters’ were fair targets. You can’t hit the bulleye if you don’t aim at it.

  14. AJStrata says:


    you keep making the point of why the conservatives are losing. McCain was not left of center, especially over illegal immigration (supported by a lot of us strong conservatives).

    McCain was as close to center as you want though. His big fallacy for me was his stands on drilling and global warming. But the killer was embryonic stem cell research.

    You cannot be pro-life and accept factories of young humans being harvested for spare parts. I would accept a woman’s right to chose over government sanctioned factories of death.

    The problem is you cannot negotiate with ‘moderates’ from an extreme minority position. You cannot lead them to understand the issues when fighting them.

    The illegal immigration issue was the idiotic suicide of the movement. Having long term illegals who only broke the paper trail law of getting a work visa become legal workers after financial restitution was not that bad an option – especially after we see the alternative now in our face with Obama and a Dem led Congress that can pass anything it wants.

    I said it back then, those short sighted fools who thought nothing serious would come of tanking the immigration bill get to see their work now and for another 4 years. And yes, I find their ignorance near criminal because of where it took this country.

    History will look back and say comprehensive immigration reform was were the far right decided to destroy the conservative movement so they could claim control over the movement – which immediately imploded.

    Pray the GOP is not going the way of the WIGS over this disaster, but it will as long as those who caused the fracturing continue to deny their responsibility and begin with the Mea Culpas.

  15. Redteam says:

    Terrye, there were just a few conservative issues that McCain had the wrong side of, unfortunately they were very important and high profile. Amnesty, global warming, not drilling in ANWR, campaign finance, the gang of 10(about judges). I’m not making a big deal of any of those, but that’s the issues that doomed McCain.

    right wing prof.
    Strange name for someone to use that claims not to be part of the “base”, whatever that is. If I were defining the ‘base’, I’d say it is people that you normally expect to vote for the party (both parties have a ‘base’) all others, I guess, are independents. I personally don’t know all those “who scream and stomp their feet the loudest” as you said.
    I always vote for the best person, regardless of party, but I’d say that 99+% of the time, that’s Republican. I don’t go to church, I’m not a religious zealot, I do believe in Jesus and God. Abortion is “ok” in some cases. Killing is “ok” in some cases. ESCR is a waste of time and is “killing”. A secure border is necessary and Amnesty for illegals is not. I never scream or stomp my feet. Drilling for oil is ok and necessary. The earth and humanity were ‘created’ by God with evolution of the species an important part of that creation.

    So did the “far right wing conservatives’ desert the party and not vote for McCain? I don’t know, but I do suspect that a lot of people voted ‘against’ Obama, the same as a lot of the far left voted ‘against’ McCain.
    In my opinion, the US is to the right of center, unfortunately the US doesn’t know that because the MSM is so busy selling the left side to the public.

  16. WWS says:

    The Republican party has failed, and failed spectacularly. I do not seeing them making a comeback.

    But the Democrats are about to fail in an even bigger and more spectacular way as this economy crashes into depression, and everything they do makes it worse.

    Within 4 years, if not 2, both parties will be completely and absolutely discredited.

    What comes next?

  17. Redteam says:

    I had no problem with what was called immigration reform. generally speaking, as best I recall it did call for dealing with the problem, building some fence and at least having some policy. What many disagreed with, in fact the only thing many even heard, was blanket amnesty for illegals.
    I believe I supported all parts of it, except the blanket amnesty. I think amnesty for law abiding, employed(and their families) would have been ok. But seems, as I recall it, there was no plan that would have excluded criminals from the amnesty (some said so, but I don’t really know) I am a self-professed NON expert on the immigration reform bill. I just had the ‘impression’ that they wanted to give ‘everybody’ amnesty and that was what McCain was in favor of (Obama also). So the whole deal may just have been false impressions, but unfortunately the ‘real deal’ wasn’t made clear.
    But as far as immigration reform and the election, Obama and McCain had the same position and most people with that position had more in common with Obama than McCain on other issues so they supported Obama, but I don’t think immigration was any deciding issue in the election because both candidates had the same position.

    I agree with you 100% on ESCR, I’m pro-life with abortion ok “in some cases”

    I think the Republican party will be okay, they just need to get a good candidate for the next election. The Democrats exceptionally low approval rating will be much more evident in the next election, after two years of ‘rule’.

  18. Birdalone says:

    Everyone need a good laugh? From Sunday NYT magazine interview with Karl Rove;

    [NYT Debra Solomon:] Do you like Joe Biden?

    [Rove replies:] I think he has an odd combination of longevity and long-windedness that passes for wisdom in Washington.

    Crosspatch – we agree more than we disagree (Rudy the big disagreement but I am in NYC) especially on ANY group trying to impose their “social values” on everyone else. The left-wing political correctness crowd is dangerous. I think their intimidation techniques are the untold story of this election.

    Chris Cillizza has identified that there are 81 Democrats in the next House of Representatives who are conservative (at least on fiscal matters) or from CDs that voted for Bush in 2004, . THAT is a huge number to peel off from Pelosi in 2010-2012.

    The other story for 2009 is the difference in economic outcomes by states with Republican governors. 22 were just re-elected in 2008. What do these successful governors stand for?

    Conservatives lost Colorado because they spent too much time on abortion and gay marriage and not enough time on potholes. Ask pro-life Dem Bill Ritter how he became governor.

    Both parties should be forced to change their nomination process so we don’t ever have to have a year of American Idol for President again. Not that the Dems will be able to reform their particularly bizarre process now.

  19. OLDPUPPYMAX says:

    It’s a true disaster for this nation and for the American people that spineless Washington types like McConnell and Boehner seem to run from the conservative label which got them their jobs in the first place. Remarkable how little light permeates the beltway blanket created by the NY Times and the Wash Post. But as more and more of the weak kneed–like yourself–grovel to the left and display their true sentiments, we bitter clingers will be far better off in the long run. I assume you were fine with Trent Lott giving away the Senate a few years ago, in the spirit of “bipartisanship” of course. Good for the country, don’t you know. Reaching across the aisle and all that. And those estimable republican moderates spending money like water until conservatives finally quit re-electing them in 2006, why they were the true core of the party, I’m certain. What a mistake, letting them go. You can declare defeat and join the thoughtful, the pensive and the truly brainy…you know, the voters McCain believed the key to victory. That is, those who closed their eyes in the voting booth and pushed the nearest button because they just couldn’t make up their extraordinarily overworked minds. I’ll remain one of those silly fools who believes in the rights of the individual. The next time a conservative wins the White House…that is, should voter fraud ever be dealt with…you can become a conservative again. For a while.

  20. stevevvs says:

    WOW! He’s off his meds again!

    Some people are just so confussed. I am sending tis to everyone I know, with my comments inserted. It’s truely remarkable.

    Somehow, despite them not having enough votes, conservatives ruined everything.

    Even Conservatives, and ONLY Conservatives, stopped the Bush, McCain, Kennedy Amnesty bill. Dillusional.